The Post With the Most

Howdy there classmates!

Jon Zmikly posting here out of my nice U Club apartment...and maybe not so good at it yet? To tell you a little about myself, I am currently hungry, my right thumb is sore (making the space bar difficult to press at times), and my feet are slightly cold. I have a cup, tapes, some glass cleaner, and lego pieces on my desk. I hope that brings you up to speed with my life and tells you a little about my background. I am also quite interested in video production, film, music, and all of the hubbub regarding this "new media" sensation that all the teenagers are talking about.

As I read through the readings this weekend, I realized something. I had never really thought about the meaning of "new media" or its viability as a completely separate entity from "old media." I really only thought that "new media" referred to any type of updated medium, regardless of its convergence with data processing or computing. To me, HDTV would have been considered "new" media. However, Lev Manovich's New Media: A New User's Guide
schooled me on its implications and precise definitions. It was interesting to learn how the media and data processing both evolved until they finally began working together. While he does mention in New Media from Borges to HTML the fact that each medium has gone through a "new media" phase, the current definition does not classify most of these mediums as a member of the "new media" as we refer to it today.

Culturally, it is interesting to see other countries' embrace of new media and the arts. The "collective and collaborative authorship" (Manovich, New Media from Borges to HTML) could mirror a sort of kitsch art, being open to all, mainstream, consumer-based, and almost an opposite to actual art. This, coupled with its rapid growth in the U.S., made media art seem more like a technology tool than an artform. I think this has really added to our cultural view of "new media" in general, making our cyberculture more real than maybe it should be. We use new media devices to enhance and cultivate our current relationships and rely on it to convey real messages to real people, instead of understanding that it is not actually "real" (face-to-face/voice contact). It seems like as a society, we need to make more of a distinction between the media and reality, instead of blurring the lines (whether it be in art or general communication). I absolutely agree with Manovich's contention that "new media" is still a bit ambiguous and we need to further define what constitutes automation, variability and transcoding, and interactivity can sometimes be just as dubious.

Baron points out that the line continues to be blurred as cyberculture begins to affecting our writing styles and everyday face-to-face communication. While we underestimate the use of the pencil, we also overestimate computer literacy. Personally, I have a very difficult time writing notes in class, and I have the cursive skills of a 7th grader (around the time I was required to turn in computer-generated papers). While that's not too detrimental to everyday life, I do find it somewhat annoying. I also get annoyed when people can not spell correctly or they rely solely on a word processor to correct grammar and punctuation mistakes (myself included). However, as Baron states, this has happened on some scale with the introduction of almost every new medium. Any new technology will affect society in some way; however when people rely on certain mediums for communication too much, it can be detrimental instead of helpful. This chapter helped me see that even the pencil underwent severe scrutiny and nothing too catastrophic happened.

Maybe a little boring for my first real no-nonsense blog post...but I suppose it's a start